Klaus D. Witzel wrote:
> It is perhaps possible to go one step further (or go back, for that 
> matter) and have no instance traits and no class traits, but just traits 
> (subclass of ClassDescription, instVar 'users'). It can be applied to 
> either side of some class, since the whole machinery has no requirement 
> other than #traitComposition (as far as I've seen). Wouldn't that make 
> the exercise less complex and more clear, or am I missing something.

 From my POV that's even better but also a little more drastic ;-)

Cheers,
   - Andreas

> There may even be quite different compositions required for both sides 
> of a class. As an example consider making Traits (incl. their tests ;) 
> for the 5.3 Fundamental Protocols of ANSI Smalltalk 1997. This looks to 
> be impossible with dualistic traits.
> 
> /Klaus
> 
>> Cheers,
>>    - Andreas
>>
>>>> The extension points to the existing kernel are
>>>> few (and could be made fewer) and loading and unloading would be 
>>>> trivial
>>>> with just a tiny bit more work.
>>>>
>>>> In any case, this is not a complete implementation but rather an
>>>> illustration that the current implementation isn't the only way traits
>>>> can be implemented in Squeak and that an alternative can be small,
>>>> loadable, and easy to understand.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>    - Andreas
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
>